just because your son was riding on the pavement, that doesnt make it alright to drive into the side of him.
example: you are shouting and swearing at me in the street and you call me a ****. does that make it legal for me to punch you in the face? of course not.
the fact that he drove into the side of your son shows that the driver wasnt paying attention to what was in front of him.
i doubt it will come to anything tbh.

Technically it's illegal to ride on a pavement and you can be fined, I know thus because I was stopped and issued with a ticket once BUT i think most police are more pragmatic and would hope they apply common sense in most cases ... BUT if you want real legal advice on this then it, obviously, brings up a lot of questions and everybody here will guess and give an opinion but you will probably find a chat with a lawyer better... Although I have some doubts as it sounds a bit of an unusual case and suspect they wouldn't know without research. One better place might be to post up on ukcyclingrules website. If I remember tightly the guy behind it is a lawyer who commutes to his office everyday in London and decided to list the laws on various scenarios he saw everyday going to work.

The police decision will not impact at all on whether your son has to pay for the damage. Worst case your son will get a fine but given - “The DfT view, from discussions with Home Office, is that the law applies to all but the police can show discretion to younger children cycling on the pavement for whom cycling on the road would not be a safe option”, it seems unlikely any action would be taken in this regard.
On the other hand the driver is at risk of a charge of undue care as he demonstrated a lack of observation and likely came from the entrance too quickly. Did the police view the cctv?

If the driver wants recompense that is a totally civil matter and he would have take you to court. I can't see many courts having much time with a driver who after knocking over a child is then using the legal system to claw back £10 for a new number plate. Tell him to go jump.

Maybe goes to show that the pavement isn't necessarily the safest place to be anyway. Reminds me of a bit of cycle path on the outskirts of Cambridge that for about a mile went along the fron of a load of hedge and wall-fronted houses. Virtually every one of their driveways felt like a chance to get knocked off, on the few times I used it I felt far more vulnerable there than on the road (and that's without the junctions, where you're constantly having to give way and check a far greater angle than you would on the road).

To the OP, I'm not trying to imply your kid shouldn't have been there BTW!

Final update, now I'm home. Police have ruled driver was wholly at fault, following review of the CCTV footage that captured the accident. They are considering a charge of careless driving (the minimum severity offence). They also said that they don't prosecute children under 16 for cycling on the pavement.

Driver had reported an "incident" to the police for insurance purposes, but seems to have failed to mention that he had hit a child! So the Police were more than a little interested in a possible failure to report charge as well. After hearing that, I hope he gets done for both offences.

For those that want the location, it was on Dedworth Road, Windsor, West bound at the Hand Clinic, Windsor. I can't seem to embed an image link, I'm afraid. Son1 has cycled on the ROAD to his friends's house many times alone, but being with said friend, felt he had to ride on the pavement this time. I share the sentiments above about how dangerous such junctions can be - even though they are "cycle routes".

Where does your certainty come from? Reading the OP it appears that if he was mortified that was only because he'd damaged his car. Save your sympathy for cyclists getting hit by drivers who aren't really that bothered about them.